When an employer is insolvent and administrators appointed, job losses are often an inevitable consequence. In this blog we look at the legal obligations arising where redundancies meet the threshold for collective consultation, and the implications for administrators arising out of the recent Supreme Court in the case of R (on the application of Palmer) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates Court and another.

When does the legal obligation to collectively consult apply?

On 24 February, the Government published draft regulations that, if implemented, will impose new restrictions on pre-pack administration sales to connected parties. For all `substantial disposals' (which will include `pre-pack' sales) to connected parties, taking place within eight weeks of the administrators' appointment, the administrators will either need creditor consent or a report from an independent `evaluator'.

Context

Long-awaited law reform to bring Australia's insolvency regime into step with many of its trading counterparts is slated to be enacted in the second half of 2017. The text of the law is currently before parliament for debate. If passed, Australia will see:

The Australian government has released draft legislation which proposes significant legislative change to insolvency laws in Australia. One of the changes proposed, is that directors will not be liable for insolvent trading in certain circumstances where the company is undertaking a restructure.

Under the proposed safe harbour reform, directors will not be liable for debts incurred whilst the company is insolvent if they can show that:

The increase in the availability of alternate capital in Australia over the past decade has provided a landscape for well-tested global restructuring techniques to be applied locally. This includes 'loan to own' strategies.